§ 6. Mr. Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury)If she will make a statement on the incidence of bovine TB in Gloucestershire. [86768]
§ The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Margaret Beckett)Provisional statistics show that of the 1,549 cattle herds registered in Gloucestershire, some 15 per cent.—that is, 233 herds—had a new TB incident between 1 January and 30 November 2002. That includes confirmed, unconfirmed and unclassified cases.
§ Mr. RobertsonI thank the Secretary of State for that response. However, when I spoke to the National 995 Farmers Union a few minutes ago, it was fearful that resources for the state veterinary service would be reduced. Is that the case? If so, the process of testing animals will slow down.
What is the Government's policy towards vaccination and developing vaccines? Will the Secretary of State encourage companies to develop them?
§ Margaret BeckettI am not aware of the rumours to which the hon. Gentleman referred. Indeed, 20 additional staff have been made available for TB testing in the Gloucester animal health divisional office area through the extra moneys that we gave the state veterinary service in England and Wales earlier this year.
We are doing what we can to encourage people to work on, and ascertain whether we can develop, a vaccine. However, the hon. Gentleman knows that a general review of overall science research capacity is taking place. Clearly, the serious problems of the disease will be considered in that context.
§ Diana Organ (Forest of Dean)In developing an effective policy against bovine TB, the Government set up the Krebs trials. Will my right hon. Friend give us some information on their progress? Are they taking place on all 30 sites? Given that they started in April 1998, when does she expect a report on them?
§ Margaret BeckettMy hon. Friend is right that the trial started in April 1998. However, she knows that there was a problem during the foot-and-mouth epidemic. The trial is broadly on course, but I cannot give her a date off the top of my head for when we expect to receive the full outcome of the research. We understand the difficulties and anxieties, and we believe that it is right to let the trial run its proper course. Otherwise, we will never have an answer, and groups with opposing views will continue to accuse each other of getting it wrong.
§ Mr. James Gray (North Wiltshire)Does the Secretary of State accept the principle, or at least the possibility, that the very existence of the Krebs trials in Gloucestershire may to some degree be responsible for the higher incidence of TB in that county and in neighbouring Wiltshire? If she accepts that possibility, does she also accept that those farmers who find themselves in a Krebs trial area have a greater claim to consequential compensation for milk loss than do farmers in non-Krebs areas? If she does not accept it, will she explain why farmers in the Whitminster area of Gloucestershire receive consequential compensation for milk loss even though that is not the case in other Krebs areas? Once again, will she reconsider whether there is an argument for consequential loss payments to farmers in Krebs areas?
§ Margaret BeckettI take the hon. Gentleman's point, but I simply say to him that the Krebs trial was set up because the subject is bedevilled by suspicion, anecdotal evidence and perfectly understandable concerns for the health of animals and human beings. Of course I accept that people in the Krebs trial areas feel that they are being disadvantaged, but until we have the outcome of those trials nobody will really know what the methods 996 of transmission are and how they would be affected. Consequently, his further question on what might be due to people who find themselves in those circumstances clearly cannot be dealt with. The key thing is to try to get the trials finished and get some outcome. Otherwise, we will go on like this for the next 20 years.